Protectors or enablers? Untangling the roles of traditional authorities and local elites in foreign land grabs in Cameroon

Motivation In Cameroon, most land earmarked for allocation to foreign investors is communally owned. The state, however, considers such land as “empty” or “underutilized”—a faulty designation that confers upon the Cameroonian state and state representatives sweeping authority to allocate lands to potential investors without full consultation with communities whose livelihoods depend on them. Purpose The article addresses the following questions: who are traditional authorities in the context of Cameroon? What is their place in the complex dynamics of neopatrimonial governance, and how does this influence their allegiance to state versus the people they ought to represent? How do they collaborate to enable state actions during land grabbing against their people? Methods and approach The study is based on interviews, group discussions, and field observations conducted as part of a larger project on land grabbing in Cameroon; and supplemented with secondary sources through critical reading of published and unpublished scholarly and technical sources, including reports from national non‐governmental organizations (NGOs) such as Nature Cameroon as well as Green Peace, the World Bank, and other bodies. Findings It argues that land grabbing in Cameroon should be understood as an outcome of the state’s strategic and/or opportunistic choice, within a neopatrimonial dispensation, to enforce its political power over land and related resources. Local traditional authorities paradoxically play the role of state facilitators in the process, rather than serving as custodians of the populations they represent. Policy implications The article concludes that such pernicious land acquisition would not have been successful without the active collaboration of traditional authorities (so‐called state enablers) who act as “brokers” and facilitators of land deals—sometimes using threats, intimidation, and force on villagers. There is a need for policies to tackle the accountability problems arising from the ambivalent role that local traditional authorities play in Cameroon’s neopatrimonial order—doubly serving as de facto representatives of local peoples, and at the same time as proxy enablers of large‐scale land acquisition.